Skip to main content
JAMA Network logoLink to JAMA Network
. 2019 Sep 3;179(11):1–3. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.3066

Association Between Data Sources and US Food and Drug Administration Drug Safety Communications

Noam Tau 1,2, Tzippy Shochat 3, Anat Gafter-Gvili 2,4, Ariadna Tibau 5, Eitan Amir 6, Daniel Shepshelovich 2,4,
PMCID: PMC6724416  PMID: 31479104

Abstract

This study describes sources of initial safety signals that that preceded US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug safety communications and examines their associations with drug characteristics and subsequent label changes.


Drug safety communications (DSCs) are the primary tool for the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to communicate important new postmarketing safety information to patients and health care professionals.1 Drug safety communications are issued by the FDA for more than one-quarter of new drug and biologic approvals.2 There are known inconsistencies in issuing DSCs across national regulators.3 Less is known about the information source that typically serves as the basis of the initial safety signals that lead to DSCs, such as spontaneous reports aggregated through the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS),4 results from randomized clinical trials (RCTs), or observational studies. Our objective was to describe the sources of the initial safety signals that lead to DSCs and examine their associations with drug characteristics and subsequent label changes.

Methods

The study included all DSCs issued between January 29, 2010, when DSCs first became publicly available, and December 31, 2018, identified from the FDA website.5 We excluded DSCs for over-the-counter drugs. For each DSC, we determined the information source that served as the basis of the initial safety signal, categorized as FAERS data, RCTs, or other sources, including observational data. We used the Fisher exact test for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables to examine associations between information source and initial regulatory approval pathways, time in years between initial approval and DSC posting, characteristics of clinical studies included in the most recent drug label prior to DSC publication, and subsequent safety-related changes to the drug label. We used Spearman rank correlation testing to examine for changes in the number of DSCs issued annually. Analyses were performed using SAS, version 9.4 (SAS Institute). Statistical significance was defined as a 2-sided P < .05.

This study was exempt from the requirement for ethical approval according to the Government of Canada Panel on Research Ethics (http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html) because of its exclusive use of publicly available data.

Results

The FDA issued 228 DSCs from 2010 through 2018. The most common medical specialties related to the subject drugs were endocrinology (44 [20%]), infectious diseases (39 [17%]), and neurology (27 [12%]) (Table 1). Of the DSCs issued (N = 228), 15% (35) were in 2010 and 26% (58) in 2011, whereas 4% (10) were issued in 2017 and 5% (11) in 2018 (P = .005).

Table 1. Characteristics of 228 DSCs.

Characteristic No. (%)
Medical specialty
Endocrinology 44 (20)
Infectious disease 39 (17)
Neurology 27 (12)
Psychiatry 20 (9)
Cardiology 19 (8)
Oncology and malignant hematology 12 (5)
Benign hematology 12 (5)
Other 55 (24)
Initial approval of subject drug
Prior to 1980 28 (12)
1980-1989 28 (12)
1990-1999 62 (27)
2000-2009 64 (28)
2010-2018 46 (20)
Initial approval regulatory pathwaya
Orphan drug designation 37/198 (19)
Accelerated approval 22/162 (14)
Fast track review 49/140 (35)
Priority review 91/162 (56)
Safety communication publication year
2010 35 (15)
2011 58 (26)
2012 26 (11)
2013 29 (13)
2014 15 (7)
2015 25 (11)
2016 19 (8)
2017 10 (4)
2018 11 (5)
Years between initial approval and safety communication, median (IQR) 12.2 (4.8-21.5)
Data source
FAERS 87 (38)
RCTs 81 (36)
Other sources 60 (26)
Observational or epidemiologic studies 30 (13)
Non-RCT studies 8 (3)
Regulator-initiated assessmentb 16 (7)
Other 6 (3)

Abbreviations: DSCs, Drug Safety Communications; FAERS, Food and Drug Administration Adverse Events Reporting System; IQR, interquartile range; RCTs, randomized clinical trials.

a

For DSCs related to drugs approved after pathway introduction: 1983 for orphan drug designation (198 DSCs), 1992 for priority review and accelerated approval (162 DSCs), and 1997 for fast track designation (140 DSCs).

b

Drug safety communications triggered by assessments initiated by a regulatory body without a clear statement of the data source triggering the assessment.

Among the 228 DSCs, the most frequent information sources that served as the basis of the initial safety signal were FAERS (87 [38%]) and RCTs (81 [36%]). Time in years from initial approval to DSC posting was significantly shorter for DSCs triggered by FAERS or RCTs vs other sources (FAERS: median [interquartile range (IQR)], 10.4 years [2.9-21.6 years]; RCTs: median [IQR], 10.8 years [4.8-17.0 years]; and Other: median [IQR], 20.2 years [11.6-32.2 years]; P < .001) (Table 2). Common subsequent changes to drug labels included additional warnings and precautions (103 [45%]) and boxed warning (42 [18%]).

Table 2. Source of DSCs, DSC Characteristics, and Subsequent Safety-Related Label Changes.

Source of Initial Safety Signal No. of DSCs (%) P Value
Overall (N = 228) FAERS (n = 87) RCT (n = 81) Other (n = 60)a
Initial approval regulatory pathwaysb
Orphan drug designation 37/198 (19) 20/76 (26) 15/78 (19) 2/44 (5) .008
Accelerated approval 22/162 (14) 13/64 (20) 8/67 (12) 1/31 (3) .07
Fast track review 49/140 (35) 26/57 (46) 15/59 (25) 8/24 (33) .07
Priority review 91/162 (56) 40/64 (62) 29/67 (43) 22/31 (71) .02
Data included in most recent label, median (IQR)
No. of clinical trials 7 (3-18) 5 (2-15) 7 (3-17) 8.5 (3-21) .38
Documented RCT, No. (%) 206 (90) 80 (92) 72 (90) 54 (90) .81
No. of patients 3849 (1363-10 537) 2334 (1005-7136) 4668 (2117-11 000) 4538 (1305-12 205) .33
Time from initial approval to safety communication, median (IQR), y 12.2 (4.8-21.5) 10.4 (2.9-21.6) 10.8 (4.8-17.0) 20.2 (11.6-32.3) <.001
Subsequent changes to drug label
Additional boxed warning 42 (18) 20 (23) 15 (18) 7 (12) .38
Additional warning and precautions 103 (45) 42 (48) 35 (43) 26 (43)
Additional other safety data 34 (15) 12 (14) 11 (14) 11 (18)
Unchanged safety data 43 (19) 13 (15) 17 (21) 13 (22)
Removal of safety data 6 (3) 0 (0) 3 (4) 3 (5)

Abbreviations: DSC, drug safety communication; FAERS, Food and Drug Administration Adverse Events Reporting System; IQR, interquartile rate; RCT, randomized clinical trial.

a

Including non-RCT studies and reports and regulator-initiated assessments.

b

For DSCs related to drugs approved after pathway introduction: 1983 for orphan drug designation (198 DSCs), 1992 for priority review and accelerated approval (162 DSCs), and 1997 for fast track designation (140 DSCs).

Discussion

The leading initial sources of DSCs were the FAERS program and RCTs. Despite known underreporting of safety information to voluntary passively collected pharmacovigilance programs, the large proportion of DSCs initiated by FAERS suggests that the FDA relies on the program for postmarket drug safety monitoring. Similarly, the continued utility of RCTs for identifying new safety issues is at odds with recent legislation promoting the replacement of traditional RCTs with real-world data analyses to help support the approval of supplemental indications or the fulfillment of postapproval study requirements.6 Our study appears to show that relatively few DSCs were initiated by real-world data.

This study has limitations. First, the source of the initial safety signal triggering DSCs might not have been clearly stated or represent all safety data reviewed by the FDA. Second, the present study was limited to initial safety signals. Inclusion of secondary or confirmatory safety signals may have represented different information sources.

The FDA Adverse Event Reporting System and RCTs triggered most DSCs and were associated with shorter time from initial approval to FDA issuing DSCs. These data might inform clinicians and regulators of the current state of postmarketing monitoring of toxic effects and assist in guiding future improvement efforts.

References


Articles from JAMA Internal Medicine are provided here courtesy of American Medical Association

RESOURCES